Pay me, onebaggers

Though written from a different perspective, there’s a lot of sanity and wisdom in this column:

There is currently a bill before American legislators that would set one standard for bags carried aboard, as opposed to allowing airlines to make their own rules about sizes. It seems a ridiculous thing to legislate, but some sanity needs to be brought to the table. Passengers who check a modest bag and carry almost nothing aboard are contributing to the quick, orderly entry and exit of the airplane. For this, they ought to be paying us, not vice versa. - Kelly Egan in the Ottawa Citizen

Comments

[Maria]

Thought provoking. I fear, if airlines decide that to enable hefty fees for carry-on bags, they will restrict the carry on measurements to the equivalent of a passport, then they might as well start weighing passengers and expect us to pay up by the pound. Yes, there are plenty of jackets with multiple pockets etc, but people will still expect to bring what they feel they need as a carry-on, even if it's on their person. I have the image of people waddle through the aisles with the equivalent of a kitchen sink strapped to their body as to not pay a carry-on fee.

When I travel, I have a small carry-on, plus a purse, and if need be - that can be put into the carry on bag, although I'd rather not do so. Both these items fit under the seat in front of me, I don't use the overhead bins. Granted I'm not tall and am rather slim, and do take advantage of any pockets on my person. I've been hit in the head while in the asile seat with a folding stroller or heavy bag that falls out from the bin overhead, I've had purple bruises and scrapes from someone else trying to get down the slim aisles with their heavy bags and they have fallen into me while I'm seated - sometimes as far in as the window seat. Not everyone can pack as a one-bagger like we do. But I see that people do try. It's the extreme abuse that causes the upset and anger.

Would I want to pay a fee to bring on the equivalent of a purse as a carry-on? Not likely. Will I pay a fee to bring on a bag the size of a Tom Bihn Tri-Star? Not when I see the extreme's that people get away with. I'll grumble about it when I get hit with such. And will look into the fees for Fed Ex to ship my things to my destination. Just because!

[Monte]

Egan just does not get it. Not all carry-ons are the maximum allowable size. One-baggers are careful not to hit the maximums, at least most are. There are, however, those travellers who do try to cheat. A few weeks ago in Seattle we saw an airlines employee mingling amongst the boarding hoard and telling some people their carry-on was too big and that they would have to check it at the gate. One person, going through Narita to Manila put up a stink but it didn't do her any good. Coming back, the same process was going on at the Manila airport, a person mingling with the passengers who had been cleared for boarding and putting a tag on each acceptable carry-on. Those that didn't make the cut had to check their bags through the regular bag check counters. We have never had a problem with weight and size, but not everyone is as judicious. Then too, we don't ahve wheelies.

Another point Egan ddresses is the egress from the plane and how it is affected by carry-on passengers. Is he one of those people who just can't wait to get out and puches and shoves? If he is I would like him to try it in front of my wife. We haven't seen a problem with getting out of the plane. Emtying a 747-400 that is full will take time, and that is not the fault of carry-on bags.

Egan needs to have a little talk with reality.

[williamsg4713]

In a way, I can see Egan's point. If everyone carried their bags on board (if aircraft design permitted that), we'd all save time in the terminal, but we'd give up time boarding and unboarding. If no one carried a bag on board, we'd all save time boarding, but would give it back waiting for our luggage. The worst position to be in is to be the only person who has checked a bag, which means waiting both at the luggage carousel and while everyone else stows and unstows their bags.

My reason for resenting this charge is that part of Spirit's justification is "Charging for checked baggage changed the balance between checked and carry-on?" Well, duh! But you could equally well restore that balance by eliminating the checked baggage charges.

What might help is for Travelocity and Expedia to ask questions like "How many bags will you check?", "Will you buy lunch on-board", "Will you watch television?", "Will you use the restroom?", etc. and only then list flights in (total) price order. Because the whole reason for nickel-and-diming, in this or any other market, is to make your advertised price lower than what most travelers will actually pay, and that's especially important when offerings are sorted by price.

[Laurie]

Senator Charles Schumer of New York just announced (4/11/10) he plans to fight carry on bag fees. I think it's interesting that Spirit's tact is to levy another surcharge for flying with them rather than enforce their current carry-on policies. What's scary is our legal system allows this sort of tactic, when perhaps they should compel a company to follow their own rules first. It unnecessarily pits passenger against passenger; creates more rules, laws and loopholes in an ever increasingly complex society. Limiting complexity in my life is why I travel light to begin with.

[Luke]

The airlines need to work together to nip this in the bud. Either adopt the European standards for ALL flights, or adopt one set for domestic flights, and another set for international. They also need ot EFFORCE the standards that they, themselves have set, and let passengers moan when told they will have to check their bags, and pay the fee, and pick it up at baggage claim. If Congress decides that they "need to do something about this" then you know that the solution will involve TSA agents checking bag sizes and weighing bags. Do we really want THAT?

[Jeff]

It shouldn't be lost on anyone that the current carryon issues are the result of airline decisions to charge for checked baggage. Every domestic flight I've been on since mid-2009 has had full overheads. Why the airlines didn't anticipate the current situation of oversized & overweight carryons jamming the overheads, while not enforcing their own carryon rules, causing safety issues for flight attendants and passengers alike is beyond me. And charging for carryons to shift more bags back into cargo holds seems to me to be just blaming customers without giving a lot of thought to solving the problem, and covering one bad decision with another.

Short of rolling back checked bag fees, or enforcing carryon rules, perhaps interior redesigns to enlarge the underseat space can be made to accommodate a new standard carryon size and eliminate the overheads.